Lake of lotus (15) authentic versus fake lineages and their

Authentic Versus Fake “Lineages” and
Their Related Meanings (4)

By Vajra Acharya Pema Lhadren
Translated by Byron K.K. Yiu

(This article is welcome to be distributed to all parties, provided that the exact
source and the author’s name should be cited for acknowledgment .)

Criteria for Distinguishing Schools
and Teachers on Their Methods of
Dharma Practice
“One is unable to enter the great ocean of the Buddhist
Dharma without faith.” Regardless of what religions,
all will use “faith” as one’s foundation of belief. The
question is where should “faith” be based upon? What
consequences would it bring if “faith” is based on wrong
reasons, and upon superstitions at the wrong directions?
Actually, what kind of criteria can assist us in correctly
building up our “faith”? The teachings in the “Lineages” of
“Vajrayana Buddhism” have their own practice guidance
that can be dated back in its long history, and have
gone through numerous generations of practitioners.
Even though these lineages might have been confirmed
to be genuine ones, with their histories coming from
when, where and whom, all of which are true, yet how
can one be able to ascertain that these teachings are,
indeed, correct, can be trusted and have not been
distorted? The comprehension of teachings, and even
the practice guidance, has all been guided by “persons”
like “Gurus, Teachers and Monks” so as to teach the
next generation’s Dharma practitioners. After all, what
criteria should be used in distinguishing these “persons”,
such that the next generation’s Dharma practitioners can
be certain that to follow them will not be wrong?
The Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had personally
mentioned four criteria in order to help Dharma
practitioners to clarify and solve the above-mentioned
questions. However, these four criteria, known as the
“Four Principles of Reliances and Non-Reliances”, have
often been misunderstood. Some people even use their
distorted explanations in order to attack “Vajrayana
Buddhism”. The “Four Reliances” (Sanskrit: catvari
pratisaranani) refers to the four types of “reliances
that one can follow” in order to lead oneself to “attain
Buddhahood” (that is, to recover the “intrinsic awareness
and great power”). These four criteria have already
been mentioned in different sutras and sastras like
The “Vimalakīrti Sutra, Mahaparinirvana Sutra,
Vaipulya Sutras, Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śastra”, etc.
[Specifically, these “Four Principles” can be found in the
following sources, including : The Southern Version of
the Great Entrance into Extinction and Cessation Sutra
(the Mahaparinirvana Sutra) Vol. VI; The Sutra of the
Great Assembly of Bodhisattvas from Every Direction
(Mahavaipulya Mahasamnipata Sutra),Vol. XXIX; The

• Criteria for Distinguishing Schools
and Teachers on Their Methods of
Dharma Practice
• The True Meaning of “To Rely Upon
the Dharma, But Do Not Rely Upon
the Person Who Expounds It”
• The Wrong Directions of “Faith”
1

Issue no.15

Dudjom Buddhist Association (International) Tel (852) 2558 3680 Fax (852) 3157 1144
：
：
4th Floor, Federal Centre, 77 Sheung On Street, Chaiwan, Hong Kong

Youtube

www.youtube.com/user/DudjomBuddhist

Facebook

Website：http://www.dudjomba.com

www.facebook.com/DudjomBuddhist

Email： info@dudjomba.org.hk

土豆
http://www.tudou.com/home/dudjom

优酷
http://i.youku.com/dudjom

Copyright Owner:
Dudjom Buddhist Association
International Limited

56.com

http://i.56.com/Dudjom

Sutra of the Great Upaya of the Requited Favours by
the Buddha, Vol. VII; The Sastra for the Greater Prajnaparamita Sutra (Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra), Vol. IX;
The Yogacarabhumi Sastra,Vol. XLV; The Essay on
the Meaning of Mahayana,Vol. XI; The Teaching on the
Ritual for Taking Refuge and Paying Respects to Lord
Buddha Shakyamuni, Upper Section, and so on.] So, it
shows that these four criteria have all been put in the
first place with regard to their importance and guiding
principle. Therefore, we should use the right view to read
into these four criteria for reliance, so that these should
not be distorted any more.

2. To rely upon wisdom awareness, but do not
rely upon ordinary consciousness (Sanskrit:
jnana-pratisaranena bhavitavyam na vijnanapratisaranena) – “wisdom” refers to the “radiant
awareness” that the “mind” originally possesses,
and which can merge with the “Dharmata”, such
that one’s Dharma practice will not deviate from
the correct and true path of “Dharmata”. This is
known as the “non-discriminating wisdom” as this
“mind” will not grasp onto things through various
discriminations. “Ordinary consciousness”, on the
other hand, refers to the “deluded mind” which has
always emerged from various discriminations, and
thus comprising of the “four cognitions, namely:
the four kinds of discriminations in accordance with
form, sensation, perception, formation” (please refer
to No. 397, Mahavai pul ya-mahasanni-pata-sutra,
Chapter 29, T13, p0205a), which means the four
types of cognitive and discriminative powers for all
kinds of matters, feelings, thoughts and behaviors
in the secular world. Because of these “four types
of cognitive and discriminative powers”, we have
been lured by the world and grasped onto all
things and experiences in such a way that we have
deviated from the “Dharmata”. It thus makes the
Dharma practitioners to become unable to recover
one’s “Dharmata” in order to “attain Buddhahood”.
Therefore, the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni has given
us his Spiritual Advice that all Dharma practitioners
should rely upon the “non-discriminating wisdom”
for one’s Dharma practice, and not to rely upon the
“deluded mind” for one’s Dharma practice.

1. To reply upon the meanings that lie beyond the
words, but do not reply upon the words alone
(Sanskrit: artha-pratisaranena bhavitavyam na
vyanjana-pratisaranena) – meaning that Dharma
practitioners should rely upon the “Dharmata” as
“Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness” to be
the true meaning and reasoning to determine the
correctness of all teachings and practice guidance.
(Please refer to the DVD on “Emptiness: Neither
Existence Nor Voidness”, published by “Dudjom
Buddhist Association”; “Dharmata” also known
as “intrinsic nature”, “primordial nature”, “Buddha
Nature”, which is the great power that all sentient
beings originally possessed. Please also refer
to the articles on the “Meaning of the Near-Death
Experiences” in Issue 4 & 5 of the “Lake of Lotus”
in which there were detailed explanations on the
‘intrinsic nature’.) It is incorrect for any teachings
and practice guidance to stray away from this
meaning and reasoning. “Dharmata” as “Emptiness:
Neither Existence Nor Voidness” is a kind of truth
and profound abstruseness of Nature, and is also
a kind of truth of “para-science”. But, it is difficult
to comprehend, and so one needs to use words,
speeches, languages, and so on in order to explain
it.
However, once it was interpreted by a “person”, and
if this “person” did not have the actual realization
of the “Dharmata”, then this person’s explanations
by means of words, speeches and languages may
deviate from the truth, or may be wrong. By relying
upon these deviated or wrong explanations for
one’s Dharma practice, the followers will end up
just like what the Chinese saying had mentioned: “if
being astray by even just a slight error, a far great
distance of the erroneous outcome will result”, which
will mean that they will never be able to recover
one’s “Dharmata” in attaining Buddhahood. In
order to avoid such shortcomings, the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni had given us his Spiritual Advice
that all Dharma practitioners should rely upon the
meaning and reasoning of the true “Dharmata” for
one’s Dharma practice, and should not rely upon
the explanations based on words, speeches and
languages for one’s Dharma practice.
2

Issue no.15

3. To rely upon “absolute meaning sutras”, but do not
rely upon the “interpretable meaning sutras” alone.
(Sanskrit: nitartha-sutra-pratisaranena bhavitavyam
na neyartha-sutra-pratisaranena) – In order to
teach countless sentient beings with various levels
of understanding, the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni
had sometimes assorted to the use of some “not
reaching perfection” (that is, non-ultimate) but
expedient teachings and metaphors in some of the
“sutras”, and thus avoid the talking of “Dharmata”
in order to make it much easier for more sentient
beings to understand and to generate their faith
and confidence, and thus these sutras came to
be known as those “interpretable meaning (Drang
Don) sutras”. On the other hand, the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni had also used some perfected and
ultimate “Dharmata” teachings in some “sutras” to
directly guide practice, and these came to be known
as those “absolute meaning (Nges Don) sutras”. As
those “interpretable meaning sutras” do not mention
about “Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness”
such that those who follow these “sutras” to practice
will never be able to recover one’s Dharmata” in order
to “attain Buddhahood”. Therefore, the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni has given us his Spiritual Advice that

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


divide up the completeness of all things, such that they
will never be able to recover the “reality of oneness” and
completeness of Nature. In other words, they will never
be able to recover the “Dharmata”. Hence, one must have
to merge the “threefold aspects” of any thing into the nongrasping “Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness”.
The terminology used in the Buddhist Dharma is known
as the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent Existence”.
The “Vajracchedika-prajna-paramita-sutra” stated:
“the thing being donated is in itself empty, the donator
is empty, and the also one who is being denoted is also
empty.”) The “Dharma”, on the other hand, means that
there is “no views of one self (i.e. the ‘ego’), no such
people who develop and act upon such views, and
no such people who have accepted such views” (thus
all those ways and means that can be acted upon in
accordance with the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent
Existence” is known as the “Dharma”).

all Dharma practitioners should rely upon “absolute
meaning sutras” for one’s Dharma practice, but
should not rely upon those “interpretable meaning
sutras” for one’s Dharma practice.
4. To rely upon the Dharma, but do not rely
upon the person who expounds it. (Sanskrit:
dharma-pratisaranenabhavitavyam na pudgdapratisaranena) – The “Dharma” refers to the
“Dharmata” which relies on “Emptiness: Neither
Existence Nor Voidness” as the truth of meaning
and reasoning. The “Person” means all those who
do not understand the “Dharmata”, including all
those “Buddhas” who had used the methods of
“interpretable meanings” to explain the Buddhist
Dharma. Is it true that even “Buddhas” should be
included as well? Does it mean that one should not
follow those Buddhas’ teachings of “interpretable
meaning”? Does this also belong to a way of “relying
upon persons”? What is its basis?

The “person” can include “those ordinary people who are
in possessions of disturbing emotions, virtuous peoples,
Dharma practitioners with faith, Dharma practitioners
who use their rational judgments in relying upon the
Buddhist teachings for their practices, and those “eight
kinds of people” (which refers to those people who can
fully comprehend and acquire the meritorious qualities
of the “Three Vehicles (Yanas), namely: the Shravaka
of ‘Hinayana: Small Vehicle’, the Pratyekabuddha of the
‘Middle Vehicle’, and the Bodhisattvas of ‘Mahayana:
Great Vehicle’”, including those people who have few
desires and be contented with one’s lot, and those
people who have the eight qualities of awareness.
The terminology for this in Buddhism is known as the
“Eightfold Enlightenment”, please refer to “The Sutra of
Eightfold Enlightenment”).

According to the Chapter 29 of the “Mahavai pul yamahasanni-pata-sutra”, the Lord Buddha had given
us his Spiritual Advice as such: “What is meant by ‘to
rely upon the Dharma, but do not rely upon the person
who expounds it’? The singular “person” refers to all
those people who grasp onto the “views of one self
(i.e. the ‘ego’), those people who develop and act upon
such views, and those people who have accepted such
views” (which means that those people who grasp onto
the “threefold aspects” of things. The “threefold aspects”
of any thing refer to the three aspects of things that are
related to the principal subjects of this matter. These
three principal subjects are “the matter in itself, the
person who is acting upon this matter, and those people
who have either accepted or endured this matter.” Those
who grasp onto these “threefold aspects” of any thing will

Vasubandhu

3

Issue no.15

“Stream Enterers (Srotapanna), Once Returners
(Sakridagamin), Non-returners (Angamin), Arhats”
(these four types of persons practice ‘Hinayana:
Shravaka Vehicle’ and achieve the four different levels
of accomplishments. These four different levels of
accomplishments are: “First Fruit: Srotapanna; Second
Fruit: Sakridagamin; Third Fruit: Angamin; Fourth Fruit:
Arhat”.). The “Pratyekabuddhas” (those who practice
‘Middle Vehicle: Pratyekabuddhayana’ to achieve its
results, and is known as “Pratyekabuddhas”). The
“Bodhisattvas” (those who practice ‘Mahayana: Great
Vehicle’ and is known as “Bodhisattvas”). Therefore,
the category of the “person” includes all those ordinary
people to those who have realized the ultimate fruit of
“Hinayana” (i.e. “Arhats”), and those of the “Middle
Vehicle” (i.e. “Pratyekabuddha”), as well as those who
have already aroused and practiced their “Bodhicitta” of
“Mahayana” (i.e. “Bodhisattvas”). Even for such a single
person, who has aroused his great compassion and
“bodhicitta” to live in this world for the benefits of all other
sentient beings, in guiding and helping those sentient
beings who are in need of help in both the human and
god realms, and has thus been reverend as the “World-

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


this: “‘To rely on Dharma’ refers to the fact that the
“Buddha has entered into the most perfect and thorough
cessation (or “maha-parinirvana” in Sanskrit), and has
recovered the most original status of the “Dharmata”.
Hence, all Buddhist Dharmas are for the recovering of
the “Dharmata”. This “Dharmata” means “Buddhahood”
(“Buddhahood” is the same as “Awareness”). Therefore,
“Buddhahood” exists forever and will never change. If
someone says that “Buddhahood” is impermanent,
then this person not only does not fully understand the
“Dharmata”, he also does not realize it. If a person does
not fully understand and does not realize the “Dharmata”,
then others cannot and should not “rely upon” this
person (which means that one should
not follow his teachings to practice).
On the other hand, the four types
of persons who have relied upon
the above-captioned four criteria to
protect the spiritual teachings, as they
should have realized and understood
the “Dharmata”, they can be the
persons to be “relied upon”. Why is
it? It is because these persons well
understood the “Buddha’s” profound,
abstruse meanings and Dharma
treasures, and so they know that
the “Dharmata” (or “Buddhahood”)
is permanent and never changing.
… The meaning of relying upon
the “Dharma” is to rely upon the
“Dharmata”, while the meaning of
not relying upon the “person” is not
to rely upon the “Sravaka” (teachings
of “Hinayana”). The “Dharmata” is
“Buddhahood”, while the “Sravaka” is
the “conditioned phenomena” (or “Samskrta” in Sanskrit).
The “Buddhahood” refers to the “eternal abiding” (“never
changing forever”), while the “conditioned phenomena”
(“Samskrta”) is “impermanent” (“continuously everchanging”).…”

Honored One”, or simply as the “Perfectly-Enlightened
One” (“Buddha”), and who has used the worldly views
to teach and guide other sentient beings. Hence, if there
are people who have relied upon such kinds of views to
practice, then they will also be considered as “relying
upon the person who expounds it”.
In order to guide those people who are grasping with
the “views of one’s self (i.e. the ‘ego’)”, and so the Lord
Buddha had advised us “to rely upon the Dharma, but do
not rely upon the person who expounds it”. The “Dharma”
means the “Dharmata” which is unchanging, non-action,
away from action, without staying, not staying, and are
all equal. If it has already been equal, then it will maintain
to be so, and even if it has not yet been
equal, it will be reverted back to equal.
It has no cause (that is, no thoughts), no
conditions to be made, having the right
certainty, with no differences between
the worldly and spiritual categories,
having the same nature and with their
properties and forms not having any
physical obstructions like “Emptiness”.
This is known as the “Dharmata” (this
paragraph was, indeed, a detailed
explanation on the features manifested
by the “Three-fold Emptiness of
Inherent Existence” of the “Dharmata”
by the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni). If
following the “Dharmata” to practice,
then it will eventually not leave the
Dharma essence of “oneness”. For
those people who can use this view
and way to practice, such that they
can visualize all “worldly and spiritual
categories” to be entering into the
same “Dharmata”, then this, indeed,
is “to rely upon the Dharma, but do not rely upon the
person who expounds it”.
This is the most correct explanation of the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni’s Spiritual Advice “to rely upon the Dharma,
but do not rely upon the person who expounds it”. But
even after that, there are still other people who do not
understand whether those sentient beings who having
received Dharma teachings from their teachers who
have understood quite well on the “Dharmata” and
“Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness”, or have
received teachings from those realized persons, or from
those “Buddhas” who have used the “Dharmata” as their
teachings to explain to other people, can they rely upon
their teachers’ explanations to practice? Will these be
“relying upon persons”? Can one really “rely upon” such
kinds of “persons”? In fact, the Lord Buddha Sakyamuni
had replied in the Chapter 6 of “Mahaparinirvana-sutra”
(please refer to the Chinese translation of “On the Nature
of the Tathagata” No.4-3 [0401c02] by Dharmaraksa of
the Northern Liang dynasty).

The True Meaning of “To Rely Upon
the Dharma, But Do Not Rely Upon
the Person Who Expounds It”
For all these years, people who believe in “Sutrayana”
have been criticizing whether or not the “Gurus” of
“Vajrayana Buddhism” can guide and direct others on all
teachings. They also question why one should respect
the “Gurus”. In fact, they believe that one should negate
the importance of the “Gurus” as they are the “persons”,
and so there is no need to follow and “rely upon” them.
Their rationale is “to rely upon the Dharma, but do not
rely upon the person who expounds it”. In using this
rationale to negate the “Gurus” has revealed that these
fault-finders, in fact, do not understand the true meaning
of the “sutras”. They have simply “garbled” the sutras

The meaning of this paragraph of the Sutra is like
4

Issue no.15

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


that, since the qualities and the levels of comprehension
of worldly people greatly vary and are so uneven in
nature, in order to guide different sentient beings to
enter into the Buddhist threshold, and to make it easier
for them to understand the “Buddhist Dharma”, the
Lord Buddha Shakyamuni has personally admitted that
some of his own teachings belong to the “interpretable
meaning sutras”. If some people follow these teachings
for their Dharma practices, it will never be able to help
them in recovering the “Dharmata”. Only those teachings
that contained the “Dharmata” and “Emptiness: Neither
Existence Nor Voidness”, to be complemented by
each and every implementation procedure and details
in matching the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent
Existence”, will then be considered as the “absolute
meanings sutras”. If people can follow these teachings
for their Dharma practices, then they will definitely be
able to recover the “Dharmata”. In this way, these can
truly be considered as the correct and true “Buddhist
Dharma”.
Dignaga

The main purpose of the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni
in expounding the “interpretable meanings sutras” is
to guide all sentient beings to enter into the Buddhist
threshold at the beginning, and then slowly lead them
through to correctly understand the true “Buddhist
Dharma”. As such, this is actually an “expedient
measure”, whereby one can “first use their desires in
order to attract and hook up the sentient beings, after
which one can then lead them to enter into the Buddha’s
wisdom.” Since those “interpretable meanings sutras”
are not the correct and true “Buddhist Dharma” and so
the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni himself had stated that:
if the “Buddha” expounds those “interpretable meanings
sutras”, all sentient beings should not follow them for
their Dharma practices; otherwise, this is still considered
“to rely upon person”, for which one cannot and should
not do so.

and have distorted the true meaning of “to rely upon the
Dharma, but do not rely upon the person who expounds
it”.
The Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had set out the criteria of
the “Four Principles of Reliances and Non-Reliances”,
with the aim to assist Dharma practitioners to recover
the “Dharmata” in order to “attain Buddhahood”. In order
to achieve this goal, the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni
had specifically set out the various criteria for Dharma
practitioners in seeking for teachings, in practicing the
Buddhist Dharma, and in “relying upon” the teachers.
Therefore, no matter which of the criteria, these have all
been set up around the main theme of the “Dharmata”.
Even though the contents of the “sutras” are not easy
to be understood, it should not be distorted in such a
way as what some of the people have been saying these
days that: “For one’s Dharma practice, one can only rely
upon the ‘Dharma’, but one should not rely upon any
‘persons’.” In other words, what they are saying is this:
all “Dharmas” must be correct, while all “persons” must
be wrong. This is, indeed, quite a ridiculous and ignorant
misunderstanding, simply because not all “Buddhist
Dharmas” must be able to teach us the ways in “attaining
Buddhahood” (that is, not all “Buddhist Dharmas” must
have the “absolute meanings”); neither is it necessarily
true that, regardless of what the “Buddha” had said, we
can all rely upon them for our Dharma practices in order
to “attain Buddhahood”, simply because the “Buddha”
had also expounded on some methods of “interpretable
meanings” for Dharma practices. Furthermore, neither is
it necessarily true that all “persons” must be wrong, simply
because those highly-realized Dharma practitioners can
truly help others in guiding, instructing and verifying
them on the path of “absolute meanings” in “attaining
Buddhahood”.
The Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had explained clearly

Issue no.15

5

The Lord Buddha Shakyamuni then further explained
that the practicing method of “Hinayana” is a kind of
“conditioned phenomena” (“Samskrta” in Sanskrit), which
will change continuously, and will never enable one to
recover the eternal and never changing “Dharmata”.
Why? It is because the practicing method of “Hinayana”
solely focuses on the “emptiness of substanceless
identity” (that is, the “egolessness”), and will thus only
be able to eliminate one of the subjects “who is doing the
matter” within the “three-fold” elements. However, the
remaining two subjects – that is, “the matter itself, and
those who accept or endure this matter” – can never be
eliminated. Hence, one could not reach the stage on the
“emptiness of all phenomena”, and thus this still belongs
to the kind of “conditioned phenomena” (“Samskrta”).
Furthermore, this will arouse one’s grasping such that
it will never enable one to recover the eternal and never
changing “Dharmata”. As such, all sentient beings
should not “rely upon” them, nor should they follow their
guidance and instructions for one’s Dharma practice.

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


Existence” or not? If yes, one can be at ease to trust and
follow this school’s instructions to practice.

Put it in a simple way, the so-called “persons”, no matter
what kinds of persons in this world, if they do not fully
understand or realize the “Dharmata”, then one should
not “rely upon” them, and one should not follow their
guidance to practice the Buddhist Dharma. Regardless
of what kinds of persons, if they do rely upon the criteria
of the “Four Principles of Reliances and Non-Reliances”
to realize or fully understand the “Dharmata”, then they
themselves can become the objects for all sentient
beings to “rely upon”. Then, all sentient beings can follow
their guidance to practice the Buddhist Dharma. The socalled “Dharma”, no matter what kinds of methods of
Dharma practices in this world, if they cannot explain
and practically help to realize the “Dharmata” and
“Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness”, and
neither do they match each implementation procedure
and details with the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent
Existence”, then these cannot be considered as the
“Dharma”, simply because they are lacking of the ways
in recovering the “Dharmata”, and so they are not the
correct and true “Buddhist Dharma”.

The “Buddhist Dharma” is so abstruse and so vast as a
misty ocean that it is, indeed, very difficult to comprehend.
Therefore, one should follow some teachers to learn.
Yet, how can one make the right choice? Just take a look
at how they have taught and instructed others through
their languages, to see whether they have explained
the “Dharmata” and “Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor
Voidness” or not? Whether they have taught that each
of the implementation procedures and details have to
be matched with the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent
Existence” or not? If yes, then one can be at ease to trust
and follow their guidance and instructions to practice.
The actual practices of the “Buddhist Dharma” require
experiences, and so one would have to follow and “rely
upon” some “Gurus, Masters, Monks”. Yet, how can one
make the right choice? Just take a look at how they have
taught and instructed others through their languages,
to see whether they have explained the “Dharmata”
and “Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness” on
such kind of teachings on the “reality of the middle-way”
(that is, without deviating from the true nature of the
“Dharmata”, or “madhyama pratipad dharmata bhutatathata” in Sanskrit) or not? Whether they have taught
that each of the implementation procedures and details
have to be matched with the “Three-fold Emptiness of
Inherent Existence” or not? If yes, then one can be at
ease to trust and follow their guidance and instructions
to practice.

Therefore, no matter what kinds of religions, or what
schools within “Buddhism”, if they cannot lead the
sentient beings in recovering the “Dharmata”, then one
should not “rely upon” them and should not follow their
guidance to practice. It is because their paths will only
lead others to a “dead-end”, whereby one cannot be
liberated from the spheres of tractions within the “cycle
of karmic existence” (or “Samsara” in Sanskrit). (“Karmic
networks”: due to both “virtuous and non-virtuous” deeds
amassed over numerous past lives, a network of tractions
is formed by the “mental strengths” of oneself and others
which are mutually-influencing. Please refer to the DVD
on the “Inconceivable Law of Karma”, published by
Dudjom Buddhist Association).

If a person merely encourages other peoples to do
virtuous deeds and to keep the disciplines, and also
that some other people have followed him to do virtuous
deeds and to keep the disciplines, then all these people
can be considered as the “virtuous persons” according
to the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni. But still, one cannot
and should not “rely upon” the teachings from this kind of
people for one’s Dharma practice, as their teachings are
incomplete and not thorough enough, simply because
their teachings are still remained at the level of the
“Human-God Vehicles” (their highest achievements will
still have to take rebirths in either the “god realm” or the
“human realm”, and so their teachings are known as the
teachings of the “Human-God Vehicles”), whereby these
teachings can never be able to lead sentient beings to
be “liberated from the cycle of karmic existence”, and
can never be able to lead sentient beings in recovering
the “Dharmata”.

How can one actually distinguish their various paths?
One can only take a look at their teaching tenets to see
whether they have explained on the “Dharmata” and
“Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness” or not?
When they explain and instruct others on their Dharma
practices, whether they have each of the implementation
procedures and details to be matched with the “Three-fold
Emptiness of Inherent Existence” or not? If the answer
is yes, then one can be at ease in trusting and following
their tenets for one’s practice. However, if they do not
have it, and even though this belongs to “Buddhism” but
since their “sutras” of such schools are the “interpretable
meaning sutras”, then one should not “rely upon” them
and should not follow their teachings for one’s Dharma
practice. Actually, how can one distinguish between those
“sutras” that are of the “interpretable meaning sutras”
from those of the “absolute meanings sutras”? Just take
a look at the contents of the “sutras” and see whether
they have expounded the “Dharmata” and “Emptiness:
Neither Existence Nor Voidness” or not? Whether they
have each of the implementation procedures and details
to be matched with the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent
6

Issue no.15

The meaning of the Chapter 8 “On Longevity, No. 4
Upper” [0410a17] in the “Collection of Explanation of
Mahaparinirvana-sutra” is like this: “The criteria of the
Four Principles of Reliances and Non-Reliances is used
to distinguish between what is the “correct Dharma” and
the “correct person”. In this way, these criteria can assist
one to make a choice on the “correct Buddhist Dharma
and correct methods for Dharma practices”, as well as
on the “correct persons” such that all sentient beings can

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


virtuous deeds, while ignoring the core essences of
the “Buddhist Dharma”, then this will cause people
to misunderstand “Buddhism” as some kind of a
superstitious religious sect in asking people to “worship
idols, chant and recite certain things”, and only concerns
itself of doing virtuous deeds. To this end, it is no different
from any “other religions”. This is, indeed, equivalent to
the “termination of the Wisdom Life of the Buddha, and in
the extinguishing of the Lamp of the Buddha’s Mind”. The
“doing of virtuous deeds” can help one to accumulate
good fortunes and merits, and with strong merits, one
might then be able to make connections in learning the
correct and true “Buddhist Dharma”, and can then further
proceed onwards toward “spiritual elevations”, and can
thus be a part of one’s Dharma practice. In this way, those
mundane and worldly “virtuous deeds” can also help in
assisting the expansion of “Buddhism”, but one should
not “confuse the primary cause by the secondary cause,
nor placing the unimportant things before the important
things”. Because, after all, the “doing of virtuous deeds” is
only the “mundane” and worldly affairs, and will never be
able to help people to become “liberated from the cycle
of karmic existence”. Whereas, the teachings on the
“Dharmata” and the “Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor
Voidness” will, indeed, be the “spiritual ways” whereby
it can help people to become “liberated from the cycle
of karmic existence”, and to recover the “Dharmata” in
order to “attain Buddhahood”. For those persons who
have wrongly misused the “mundane” and worldly affairs
in representing both “Buddhism” and its “Dharma”, their
influences can be quite devastating. Hence, those who
have committed such wrongdoings should deeply repent
on their deeds in order to try their very best in reverting
back the situation, and thus help to save both themselves
and their followers who have blindly followed them.

thus “rely upon” and follow these objects to practice. …
The doing of virtuous deeds can hardly help someone to
realize the “Dharmata”.…”
Nowadays, in order to make “Buddhism” to become
prosperous, many Buddhist leaders try to follow the
inner-worldly virtuous means from other religions by
reforming “Buddhism” such that their followers will simply
do virtuous works in order to seek for their comforts of
the minds. They will even use these as their methods of
Dharma practices, and thus have spent the majority of
their times and efforts on these. For the actual practices,
they have simplified them into “solely on the chanting
of the Buddhas’ Holy Names, the reciting of Sutras,
and the worshipping of the Buddhas”. In this way, they
have abandoned altogether the most fundamental
essence of the “Buddhist Dharma” – the “Dharmata” and
“Emptiness: Neither Existence Nor Voidness” on such
kind of methods for Dharma practices on the “reality of
the middle-way” (“madhyama pratipad dharmata bhutatathata” in Sanskrit), and thus accelerates the process
in making “Buddhism” to enter into the “Dharma-Ending
Age”, whereby Buddhism becomes “only an empty word”
while losing its true meanings behind it. Thus, all these
will only make the correct and true “Buddhist Dharma”
not being able to generate its true meanings. As such,
there is no need for any “other religions” to make an
attack on “Buddhism” itself, while it will naturally “bring
about its own extinction”. In making such kind of a singlesided reform, while only focusing on the breath of it but
abandoning the depth of it, as well as merely focusing
on the trivial matters but discarding the fundamental
essences, this move will only lead both themselves
and those who follow them not being able to recover
the “Dharmata”, thus harming both oneself and others.
Clearly, this is most unwise!

The present and future “Buddhism” leaders must,
bearing in mind the future well-beings of all sentient
beings as the fundamental basis, have to restructure the
focus, main points and plans for their propagation of the
Holy Dharma, instead of using the criterion as to whether
it will help their schools and sects to become strong and
powerful as their only consideration. Furthermore, this
is in no way some kind of an in-fighting between the
“Sutrayana” and the “Vajrayana” within Buddhism itself.
They should, instead, use the correct and true “Buddhist
Dharma” to lead and guide all sentient beings, and
thus emphasizing on the importance of those methods
of Dharma practices that could lead them to become
“liberated from the cycle of karmic existence”. At the
same time, they should only rely upon the “absolute
meaning sutras” in choosing those methods of Dharma
practices, instead of just using a few words or sentences
from some “interpretable meaning sutras” in deceiving
all other sentient beings.

“Buddhism” has given the ordinary people a general
impression of “doing virtuous deeds, mantra-chanting,
chanting of the Buddhas’ Holy Names, the reciting
of Sutras and worshipping Buddhas”. They believe
that these acts are the true kind of Dharma practices,
and can thus help them either to gain rebirths in the
Buddhas’ Pure-lands, or even can lead them in “attaining
Buddhahood”. Indeed, the criteria of the “Four Principles
of Reliances and Non-Reliances”, as set out by the Lord
Buddha himself, have become the most important criteria
to “right the wrongs”. The right way for the propagation
of the Holy Dharma should include both “breadth and
depth”. But, which one is the primary, and which one is
the secondary? Since the “Dharmata” and “Emptiness:
Neither Existence Nor Voidness” are the core essences
of the “Buddhist Dharma”, and so we should focus and
concentrate our full forces in the propagation of these
teachings in order that the correct and true “Buddhist
Dharma” can really be preserved. This is, indeed, the true
meaning of “prolonging the Wisdom Life of the Buddha,
and in the lighting up of the Lamp of the Buddha’s Mind”.

If one is skewed towards only emphasizing on doing
Issue no.15

7

If all the schools and sects within Buddhism can put
aside their own prejudices, and rationally use the “Four
Principles of Reliances and Non-Reliances” as the
foundation, and mutually cooperate to complement

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


it can be said that it will be a great loss to the whole of
“Buddhism”, as well as to all those sentient beings who
intend to practice the Holy Dharma in order to become
“liberated from the cycle of karmic existence” at the end
of the day (please refer to the article on “The Meaning of
Near-death Experiences” in the 15th Issue of the “Lake
of Lotus” on the explanations of both the theory and
practice of “attaining Buddhahood”, as well as on the
case study for illustration).
In modern days, some of the Dharma propagators
of “Tibetan Buddhism” only know how to “give
empowerments and conduct ritual activities”, and only
boasting on such things as “living buddhas, big titles,
supernatural powers and psychic powers” so as to
attract their “superstitious” believers and their offerings.
Yet, no explanations on the “Dharmata” and “Emptiness:
Neither Existence Nor Voidness” have been added into
the practices when they try to explain the details of all
their “empowerments and practicing rituals”, neither will
they teach others as to how to match their practices
with the “Three-fold Emptiness of Inherent Existence”.
Hence, not only were the important “Guidance and
Oral Pith-Instructions” all missing, and even if they do
have them, these are not matching with the “Three-fold
Emptiness of Inherent Existence”. As a result, this will
only attract a bunch of “superstitious” followers, and thus
even some members from the “Triad Gangs” are being
attracted. This has led to the behaviours and speeches
of the majority of “Tibetan Buddhist” believers to have
deviated from the correct and true “Buddhist Dharma”,
which makes others to look at askance. These socalled Dharma practitioners are using the “reciting of
mantras” as a means to fulfill their own worldly desires.
Even though they might, once in a while, practice the
rituals and only in rare occasions, they will only beg for
fortunes, longevity, health and good luck. Such moves
will only bring demise upon the correct and true “Buddhist
Dharma” and the whole of “Tibetan Buddhism” and will
lead it to fall into the “Dharma-Ending Age” by simply
turning it into a “hollow shelf with no substance in it”.

Aryadeva

with each other in their strengths to plan and formulate
different levels of methods for Dharma practices, then
this will be most beneficial to all sentient beings and
also to the whole of “Buddhism” as well. On the other
hand, if the different schools and sects try to use their
own means of distorting the “Buddhist Sutras” for their
own ulterior motives, or criticizing irrationally and without
bases on some “Buddhist Sutras” as “fake sutras”, then
the greatest victims of all will be all the sentient beings,
and of course the whole of “Buddhism” itself. Conversely,
the biggest beneficiaries will be all the “other religions”.
This will only become “painful for those who love it, while
joyful for those who hate it” !
It is because the “Dharmata” and the “Emptiness:
Neither Existence Nor Voidness” is a theoretical
basis, and is so very abstract that it is not easy to
be understood. Furthermore, it is not easy at all to
put this into real practice. Hence, this is why that this
fundamental essence of Buddhism has been ignored
by those “ignorant” Dharma propagators. As for the
“practicing ritual texts” (or “Sadhanas” in Tibetan) in
“Tibetan Buddhism”, especially those of the “Completion
Stage” (or “Dzog-rim” in Tibetan) and those of the “Great
Perfection (or “Dzog-chen” in Tibetan) and Great Seal
(or “Mahamudra” in Sanskrit)”, they are the methods
of Dharma practices that are the complete methods on
practicing the “Dharmata” and the “Emptiness: Neither
Existence Nor Voidness” on such kind of methods for
Dharma practices on the “reality of the middle-way”
(“madhyama pratipad dharmata bhuta-tathata” in
Sanskrit). And since each and every implementation
procedures and details do match with the “Three-fold
Emptiness of Inherent Existence”, these are, in fact,
the most effective practicing methods. Furthermore, the
detailed explanations of these “practicing ritual texts”
have come to be known as the important “Guidance and
Oral Pith-Instructions”, which are the true connotations.
Therefore, if the “Sutrayana” resist the “Vajrayana”, then
Issue no.15

8

Why is it that the “Sutrayana” has resisted the “Vajrayana”?
It might be because they are suspicious of their practices
since they do not understand the connotations behind
them. But, probably another reason has actually got to do
with the kinds of behaviors that were exhibited by those
“Vajrayana” propagators and their followers in the eyes
of the “Sutrayana” propagators and their followers. One
of the reasons for their resistances is that it puts deep
respects upon the “Gurus” in “Vajrayana Buddhism”.
Yet, in recent times, there are so many “fake gurus” that
have frequently emerged who have made use of their socalled commands of respecting the “Gurus” in abusing
their followers and believers, and in doing whatever
they like. These are the black sheep of the family! The
happenings of all these cases have been blamed by the
“Sutrayana” propagators and their followers, and so they
have used the excuse “to rely upon the Dharma, but do

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


not rely upon the person who expounds it” in attacking
the whole of “Vajrayana Buddhism”. There is a Chinese
saying that “there must be some withered branches
in a big tree, and there must also be some beggars in
a big clan”. No matter what religions, or what schools
or sects of Buddhism it may be, and even though it
may have a rigorous system, it is still unavoidable that
various kinds of scandals and frauds will happen. But,
after all, having some kind of a system with some criteria
should always be better than having no systems with no
criteria. Hence, the Founder of Tibetan Buddhism, Guru
Padmasambhava, has warned us time and again: “Not
to examine the teacher is like drinking poison; not to
examine the disciple is like leaping from a precipice.”
In fact, the problem has nothing to do with “respecting
the Gurus”, simply because the “respect for a Guru” is
a necessary condition for practicing successfully in the
actual practices of “Vajrayana Buddhism”. The actual
and fundamental problem really lies in whether those
seekers of Dharma teachings have used the abovecaptioned important criteria to observe and choose their
“Gurus” or not?

Dharma practice will enable one to achieve the profound
“Meditation” (or “Samadhi”) and “Wisdom” (or “Prajna”).
However, the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni did not mention
that the keeping of these “disciplines and vows” can help
one to recover the “Dharmata”. Nowadays, some people
have distorted these teachings altogether by saying that:
“The Lord Buddha himself had mentioned that after his
passing away, all kinds of persons should not be the
teachers, but one can only ‘rely upon the disciplines and
vows as teachers’, and that one should only have ‘to rely
upon the Dharma, but do not rely upon the person who
expounds it’”.
The personal “Guru” of Ven. Ananda was the Lord
Buddha himself. After the Lord Buddha’s “mahaparinirvana”, there was, of course, no one else who
could become Ven. Ananda’s “Guru”. Therefore, the
Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had replied to Ven. Ananda
by saying that: “You should rely upon ‘disciplines and
vows’ (“Sila-Paramita”) as your ‘master’”, but then the
Lord Buddha did not say that this is the “only master”,
simply because that even after the Lord Buddha’s “mahaparinirvana”, the Lord Buddha himself was still continued
to be Ven. Ananda’s “Guru”. Hence, the answer that the
Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had given to Ven. Ananda
was specifically for Ven. Ananda himself, but it can also
be the same answer that all common people can follow.
This is because all “disciplines and vows” are actually
some of the criteria for one’s Dharma practices, and are
the necessary criteria in reaching certain standards and
levels. Some criteria can assist one to accumulate more
virtues and merits, while some other criteria can help
one to elevate one’s own wisdom. Similarly, some other
criteria can help you to be free from sufferings, while
some other criteria can assist you to gain rebirths in the
Buddhas’ Pure-lands. Furthermore, some other criteria
can help you to become liberated from the cycle of karmic
existence, while some other criteria can assist you to
recover the “Dharmata” in order to “attain Buddhahood”.

Some may ask: How to observe? Use what kinds of
criteria to observe? The Ven. Kashyapa (one of the great
disciples of the Buddha) had asked the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni on these questions, and the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni had replied by using the “Four Principles
of Reliances and Non-Reliances” as the answers to his
questions. These “Four Principles of Reliances and NonReliances” can be described as the criteria, standards,
specifications and norms, and thus some people have
even named them as the “Vows of the Four Principles
of Reliances and Non-Reliances”, simply because if one
does not rely upon these criteria to practice, then one
will never be able to recover the “Dharmata”. Before
the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had entered into “mahaparinirvana”, the Ven. Ananda (another great disciple of
the Buddha) had asked the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni
by saying: “if the ‘Lord Buddha’ had left us, then whom
should we rely upon as our teacher?”
In the chapter “On Bequeathed Teaching” No. 1 [0901a24]
of the “Mahaparinirvana-sutra”, the Lord Buddha
Shakyamuni had replied by saying that the “keeping
of disciplines and vows” can help to arise in oneself
the profound “Meditation” (or “Samadhi” in Sanskrit)
and “Wisdom” (or “Prajna” in Sanskrit). Yet, there are
different kinds of “disciplines and vows”: there are those
“disciplines and vows” for “Hinayana”, “disciplines and
vows” for “Mahayana”, and “disciplines and vows”
for “Vajrayana”. As the Ven. Ananda was practicing
“Hinayana”, and so the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had
replied by saying that: “Sila-Paramita” is your master”
(“Sila-Paramita” in Sanskrit, with its abbreviation
simply as “Sila”’, has its direct translation as ‘cool and
refreshing’, which is the true meaning of “disciplines and
vows”). Hence, to rely upon this “Sila-Paramita” for one’s
Issue no.15

From what we have mentioned earlier, it can be seen
that the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni had actually given
the most correct and true, as well as the most complete,
answer to Ven. Kashyapa. Those who have distorted
the Buddhist Dharma, may be either out of “intentional”
or “unintentional” reasons, must be very “careful” about
their own doings, or else one will have broken their
“disciplines and vows”. The best way for one to do is to
first quote the exact sources on the “original contents”
of the “Buddhist Sutras”, and then by relying upon these
“original contents” for further in-depth discussions and
studies, in order that one’s “true wisdom” will slowly
emerge. If not quoting the “original contents” of the
“Buddhist Sutras”, then one is only using one’s personal
interpretation to wantonly comment on them, which not
only will generate “ignorance” for oneself, but will also be
suspected of trying to “fool other people”.
9

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


themselves into a stage of “doomed eternality” (please
refer to the articles on the “Authentic Versus Fake
Lineages and Their Related Meanings” in Issues 12, 13
and 14 of the “Lake of Lotus” on the dangers of “doomed
eternality”). Indeed, even though some of these believers
have already met an “authentic Guru”, but since the true
meaning of the “Buddhist Dharma” is to teach oneself to
recover the “Dharmata” and so such an “authentic Guru”
will only guide the sentient beings to tame their own
“minds” but will not fulfill their worldly desires. As such,
these “superstitious” sentient beings will eventually feel
disappointed. In this way, these “superstitious” sentient
beings will be like “those people who have entered into
a mountain of treasures but have also left it emptyhanded”, as they could not receive the real benefits of
the “Buddhist Dharma”.

In front of the “Buddhist Dharma”, all sentient beings do
not understand them and will be just like a piece of white
paper. Hence, they will have to rely upon the “persons”
to explain them, or to rely upon those “persons” who
publish books to explain them, or to rely upon those
“persons” who have memorized, re-described and
recorded those “Dharma Texts”, or to rely upon those
“persons” who have practical experiences behind them
in guiding and instructing others. In the end, they still
cannot do away without “relying upon the persons”.
As such, if some people stubbornly insist that in the
practicing of the “Buddhist Dharma”, one cannot “rely
upon a person”, then this is actually an absurd “ostrich
strategy” which also shows that these people actually
only “have a very superficial knowledge” of the “Buddhist
Sutras”. Yet, they continue to use these “superficial
knowledge” in attacking other schools and thus showing
how “ignorant” they are. Yet, they claim themselves to
be the teachers of the “Buddhist Dharma”, such that it
not only mislead others but also make flaws in distorting
the correct and true “Buddhist Dharma”, and thus have
broken the “heavy disciplines and vows” in “degrading
the Buddhist Dharma and in defaming the Holy Dharma”.
As for all those sentient beings who chose to follow these
Buddhist teachers, then how can they avoid having
broken the same “heavy disciplines and vows” as their
teachers?

Then, for those “fake gurus” who will be meeting with
those “superstitious” sentient beings is simply the fitting
in of “exactly what these fake gurus would like to wish
for”, and so those fake gurus can “cheat these sentient
beings on both their monies and bodies”. However, when
the “authentic Gurus” meet with these “superstitious”
sentient beings, it is indeed not an easy thing to cope with.
There was one case in which a middle-aged divorced
woman, who has learnt “Sutrayana” for over ten years,
thought that these teachings were not powerful enough
and could hardly fulfill her own desires, and thus decided
to change over to follow the teachings of “Vajrayana
Buddhism”. She has finally found a world-renowned
young “reincarnated Dharma practitioner” (or “Tulku”
in Tibetan) from whom to learn the Buddhist Dharma.
As her desires for love has been unfulfilled, and her
divorce has made her to have serious “depression and
pains”, resulting in her having uncontrollable emotions,
but often believing herself to have already practiced to
the stage of having supernatural sensations with paranormal induction forces. As such, she has projected her
desires onto the reincarnated Tulku. She thinks that this
reincarnated Tulku had been her husband in one of her
many past lives before, and so she has tried hard to
closely get in touch with this Tulku. She also believes
that this reincarnated Tulku must have “supernatural
powers”, and so she has confirmed that this Tulku had
used “supernatural power” to enter into her dreams to
take up the responsibility as her husband in fulfilling her
own desires. When she is emotionally unstable, she
will lose her tempers and speak out on the so-called
wrongdoings of this reincarnated Tulku.

Therefore, those “persons” who guide other people are
extremely important, and must be chosen very carefully,
and so one should follow the Lord Buddha Shakyamuni’s
criteria of the “Four Principles of Reliances and NonReliances” in order to make a choice. Otherwise, it will
only end up in the “blinds leading the blinds, and all will
fall into the fire of hell”! In order to properly distinguish
the differences among “authentic versus fake lineages,
authentic versus fake gurus, authentic versus fake
teachers, authentic versus fake teachings, authentic
versus fake Buddhist Dharmas”, as well as for the
basic foundations of one’s own “faith”, all these should
be based upon the criteria of the “Four Principles of
Reliances and Non-Reliances” as set out by the Lord
Buddha Shakyamuni.

The Wrong Directions of “Faith”
For many people who started off to enter into the threshold
of “Buddhism”, and then later on established their socalled foundation of “faith” and belief based upon the
wrong directions of either the so-called “blessing powers
of the Buddhas, or on the rescues by supernatural
powers, or in the fulfilling of their own worldly desires”,
such that they have led themselves to fall prey into the
desires and wants of “superstitions”. In particular, this kind
of situation is even worse for those so-called “Vajrayana”
followers and believers. These wrong directions of “faith”
from those followers and believers help to promote many
“fake gurus and fake masters” such that they have led
10

Issue no.15

Asanga

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


Because of her “faith” that was built upon the wrong
directions, it ends up that this woman’s illness is getting
worse, while this reincarnated Tulku has innocently
become the scapegoat. Even though this reincarnated
Tulku behave in a fit and proper manner, has been using
his utmost efforts in propagating the Holy Dharma, has
never publish any books, nor has written any discourses
or discussions concerning the practice of “Yab-yum”, and
so he should not have been brought into such troubles.
Unfortunately, his well-known reputation has thus been
stained and ruined. He has been greatly harassed but
found no ways to defend, and such an incident has
even contaminated the whole of “Tibetan Buddhism”. It
is, indeed, a great pity that there are so many sentient
beings who have built their “trust” upon the blind faith
of “supernatural powers”. In this way, many more of
these kinds of troublesome people who are admiring the
“supernatural powers”, but do not want to practice at all,
will unceasingly emerge.

Guru, or a Master”, or whether he/she is just an ordinary
person, but once the person has gone through the
process of reincarnation, all his/her past memories will
then become the “hidden memories”, and so his/her
present ability will be just like any other ordinary people.
They will need to learn afresh the Buddhist Dharma,
and only through practicing the Holy Dharma will they
be able to arouse their “awareness of the Dharmata”.
Hence, whether these “Gurus” are coming back as
“reincarnated Dharma practitioners”, or whether or not
he/she has adopted back the “title” of his/her previous
life (no matter how big and renowned it was), or whether
one had the “realization” in his/her previous life (no
matter how great it was), he/she will still need to “start
afresh”. Thus, in the choosing of a “Guru”, one should
not be psychologically superstitious by throwing yourself
into impasse. No matter what kinds of “Gurus”, one must
have to rely upon the criteria of the “Four Principles of
Reliances and Non-Reliances” in order to go for further
observations for their examinations and verifications
(please refer to the article on the “Authentic Versus Fake
Lineages and Their Related Meanings” in Issue 12 of the
“Lake of Lotus” on the other criteria of examination and
verification).

Similar cases are not rare at all. Another middle-aged,
wealthy but divorced, woman believes that “Tibetan
Buddhism” do possess great attractions, and so she
wanted to learn teachings from a middle-aged male
teacher. After a while, she has started to infatuate with
this teacher without herself noticing it. Everyday, she
would find some excuses to go to the Buddhist hall
and obsessively gazing at this teacher for half a day, or
even the whole day. She had given real estate property
and a car to this teacher. Finally, this teacher could not
resist such kinds of temptations and so he has finally
abandoned his teacher’s position to follow after this lady.
As a result, it becomes a case of having a “golden house
to hide away the teacher”. These kinds of stories have
happened before in many religions as well. Therefore,
if one wants to learn “Buddhism” but then have one’s
own “faith” built upon the wrong directions, this will
only drag oneself into troubles because of vanity. For
example, there were cases that one would want to
become the “wife of a Tulku” (or “Buddhabhagavati” in
Sanskrit) in order to be envied by all others. As a result,
consequences of various negative karma will soon follow.
This is actually hurting oneself, the others and the whole
of “Buddhism”. After all, “desires” is a kind of “negative
energy”. If one is “seeking all the time but cannot get it”,
then this “negative energy” will turn inwards and attack
oneself internally, thus making one’s body to suffer from
painful illness and mental damage. If this “negative
energy” projects outwards, then it will “lead the demons
to enter into one’s body”, and then one will suffer from
various uncommon illnesses, as well as many serious
mental problems. Indeed, this is a very sad tragedy, with
“desires” as the “arch-criminal” of them all (please refer
to the article on the “The Wisdom in Directing One’s
Dharma Practice(15)” in Issue 15 of the “Lake of Lotus”
on the solutions for “desires and adversities”).

Learning Buddhist Dharma should rely upon
faith, yet there are criteria that need to be
based;
Four Principles of Reliances and NonReliances in choosing for the correct Dharma
and the correct person;
Dharmata is Neither Existence Nor Voidness,
relying on this will help to determine authentic
from fake;
Should not follow those ignorant people, but
only follow those who knew and have realized.
… (To be Continued)
This article is welcome to be distributed to all parties,
provided that the exact source and the author’s name
should be cited for acknowledgement.

Request for Reference Cases:
In order to let virtuous believers in future not to be
poisoned by the “fake gurus and fake lineages”,
we here sincerely invite those virtuous believers
who have been poisoned to mail us and disclose
to us those cheating details, the degrees of
damages, and the sham methods used by those
“fake gurus”. We sincerely hope to use these case
studies to serve as warnings and revelations to the
general public so that they will not fall into those
traps again. All these cases will be kept strictly
confidential, and alias will be used for the persons
within the cases in the articles, with the cases to
be described in a pin-pointed fashion.

The Chinese translation on the terminology of “Tulku”
as the so-called “Living Buddha” is actually a misleading
term. The original meaning of the Tibetan word “Tulku”
is actually a “reincarnated Dharma practitioner”, and is
not a “Buddha who is still living”. Regardless of whether
his/her previous life is “a Dharma practitioner, a Lineage
11

Issue no.15

：
：

Youtube


Facebook




土豆

优酷

Copyright Owner:

56.com


Lake of lotus (15) authentic versus fake lineages and their

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (18)

Similaire à Lake of lotus (15) authentic versus fake lineages and their

Similaire à Lake of lotus (15) authentic versus fake lineages and their (20)

Plus de DudjomBuddhistAssociation

Plus de DudjomBuddhistAssociation (20)

Dernier

Dernier (19)

Lake of lotus (15) authentic versus fake lineages and their